Post by dominus on Sept 9, 2016 1:51:34 GMT

After 30+ hours, life-threatening melee, and enough character deaths to make GRRM concerned, I’ve come to a conclusion about Dark Souls III… but just like the game, this isn’t going to be easy. Typically my first question for reviewing a Game or Movie is “What new ideas do they bring to the table?”. Plenty, thankfully. However, the game seems to have the intent less towards reinventing the wheel of misfortune like its Victorian brother, and more to bring the gems of previous Souls into one complete experience - ideally the best of both worlds. While I believe it likely won’t hold the same influence that either Dark Souls, Demon’s Souls or Bloodborne had, the overall gameplay experience and a greater intrigue for its story seemed more enjoyable than other souls games.

Dark Souls is a game of Life & Death, and it’s key to get the combat right. For me, this is the best they’ve done in that department. Let’s talk about monsters. While originally identified for Slow & Deliberate movesets, many enemies both large and small in DS3 have Bloodborne-esque speediness to their actions and is a welcome addition. I do have a couple issues with some of these enemy designs in earlier sections, as they seem more like palette swaps of enemies in previous games and the tactics feel like old hat. However, there are some enemy styles which I’ve only seen in DS3: The hatted imps require tactics besides running like a ninny, as their speed makes them simply too difficult to outrun; Their tendency of showing up in groups is almost reminiscent of SC’s Zerglings. My personal favorite(or least favorite) altered my character in a way that I can’t recall seeing in a game before.

So the bosses. It’s focus on challenge in “readability” seems almost exclusive to Dark Souls III. The Dancer boss is the most extreme case, moving anywhere between Call of Duty Slo-Mo to Super-Wacky-High-Speed-Blender gone horribly Awry. The subtle movements harken as early as Artorias’ unconventional fighting techniques, which required astute observation with little time to react. Even straightforward bosses can have move sets that *appear* to be done, but come with a reverse swing or second wind. If they can’t make the bosses harder in damage-dealing sense, perhaps they’ll make them harder to understand. Concordantly, Phases and solutions to boss encounters hold distinct conditions which test both Multi-Tasking ability, Crowd Control, and a tougher decisions on who among you is the greatest threat. Very good.

As for other under-the-hood changes, weaponry is more balanced than its ancestors. The BB mantra on keeping damage dealt(sans the upgrades) as more of a change in weapon style than a DPS war, it seems like a no-brainer in a game that tends to value tactical skill over statistical figures. Weapon arts are spiffy. Hardly necessary to beat the game, but allow some clever tricks by either closing the gaps, adding buffs, or doing more spectacular moves a la Boss Weapons . If the combat ain’t broke, affix it?

5 Lords, 5 Thrones. The premise is simple, The Story is not - one of the first big DS3 encounters makes that clear enough, and there‘s plenty of events outside the lords which initially leave more questions than answers. Narrative Ambiguity remains a staple with the series, but the focus on story is more apparent in contrast. Besides NPC Dialogue/Item Descriptions, it’s mostly done through a combination of the Lords & Other Bosses via cinematics/dialogue, and specific encounters through the game I.e. Questing. While we won’t be empathizing with a Walking Tree Monster anytime soon, the motives of the LoC and other major characters bring a stronger sense of interest and diversity in its antagonists that wasn’t quite as present in earlier games, where Lore might not hold as much fascination for the player in that department.

As the game benches so heavily on the earlier tropes of Souls, this may prove polarizing for its audience. People new to the series won’t be bothered, but veterans may feel it hits too close to home. Because it works so heavily as what’s both a direct and spiritual successor in terms of those core tenets, it hurts the chances of standing out as its own property. I will say though that the homages to its dark heritage(Character/Level designs item usage, etc) are pretty astounding. Some are obvious, while others may not be clear until another play through(or not at all).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It’s odd that in the field of quests, my original impression of the quest lines were underwhelming…only to realize I’d missed them completely. Of the Souls games, this holds one of the largest roster of quest lines to date and one of the most unique quest ideas I‘ve seen in some time. While it’s best to avoid spoilers on specifics, I’ll add that having several of them operate in pairs makes for better variance in quest design, though the interactions between them are hardly existent - it would‘ve been a great addition, but it’s a minor complaint.

So there’s an elephant in the room, and it’s name is Framerate Issues. I’d have been fine with Dumbo, but whatever. The answer: It’s there, but barely. At least during my runs of the game, it was present for a fraction of the game and typically in lone spots, and has yet to interfere with the combat. The issues were a slight annoyance, but by no means a deal-breaker. Blighttown, lol. If that sort of thing rustles your demons, get the PC Version. As for its visual presence, the engine is about the same as Bloodborne but unsurprisingly leans more towards the stylizations of Dark/Demon. One of the harder-to-find locales uses a background special effect I’ve never seen implemented so well, creating an ominous sensation that marks one of my favorites memories of the game. I still think there’s a bit of cost with some of these sections, though. Catacombs of Carthus feels like it was pulled straight from the Chalice Dungeons, the few enjoyable parts being that which was *around* it. Conversely, there’s a spot roughly halfway that took my breath away, followed by my life while being chased down by a spooky monster thing. Even with the caveats on repeat enemies early in the game, I’ve still seen many hostile NPCs that visually defy description. Not unless you count “Giant hairy naked hand thing” an accurate portrayal.

Listened to the soundtrack a handful of times, and can confidently say it’s one of my favorites. Unlike DS1, the battle music is enjoyable both in and out of combat, and comes with some twists to the classic souls stylings. You'll notice early in This track that there’s a greater usage of low-pitch sustained strings, I believe even Bloodborne never tried that. While leitmotifs are present for events of the parallel persuasion, more foreign tracks like this feel like a nice divergence from the norm of Drums-And-Choirs Dark Fantasy. My Favorite Track, just saying. There’s also something about Iudex Gundyr’s vocalizing that’s more meditative than threatening, though that’s hardly a complaint. What makes this soundtrack great is that it’s the jack of all trades, but they’ve mastered enough over the years to build off that as a foundation for the new…

…So, here we are. The last paragraph where everything comes into full view…Yet I’ve already laid out the cards for this deck. What’s left? If it’s classification you’re looking for(and someone’s going to kill me for the comparison, but) it feels like the Force Awakens of the Souls Series - the main difference being one has opened a door for a new generation; The other serves as both an Ode and Farewell to a franchise that helped defy the label of “Mindless Hack and Slash”. I’ll give it a 3. The three isn’t out of anything, I just like the number. If you’re looking for a rating out of 10, my instinct says 9. For those unaware, or are otherwise virginal to Souls games, Number 3’s an ideal pick to the world of Dark Souls. For people who’ve seen some or all of the series, I’d still put in a strong recommend for it - it’s a great way to cap off the series and get one last thrill before the fire fades for good.

Most games I’d touched in the days of yesteryear were a What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get sort of deal. Run around, kill X enemies, get to the exit; Back in the 90‘s, jumping into Myst offered something a bit more contemplative and cerebral to its objectives. Of course, there’s a wide volume of Point-And-Click adventures which also threw out the idea of iterative gameplay - typically not with the same Seclusion or First-Person Perspective, though. And decades later, here we are with The Witness, which carries many…Hmm. The game comes under the wing of Jonathon Blow - a man enamored with building riddles that undermine conventional design for its genre. So, Let’s get to the point: Is the game just drawing lines on a screen?

Yes. And No. Mostly Yes, But Sometimes No. Except on Weekends. The Witness holds the same allure as Braid and Portal, as its mechanics are deceptively simple; All puzzles begin with a circle, and end with a line. However, the rules and the puzzle’s designs make for often mind-bending solutions to what you’d expect - Symbols cover these squares, but what do they mean? Each one drastically changes the means to unravel it, varying from “Blocking Off” sections for certain colored squares, or subtracting a piece of Iconography. I’m sure your trusty line-maker-thingy is up to the task. The game gives no hints to how these rules work - your first interpretation may not lead you to victory, so experimentation provides vague clues to its hidden meaning. It’s not often I see these types of puzzles open to such broad interpretation.

Even if you’ve mastered a particular kind of puzzle, the game can throw multiple symbols-types in a single challenge. It may sound daunting, but solving some of these really does bring in that “Aha!“ moment - especially for the lengthy brainteasers. On the other hand, a small percentage have a fairly trivial set of permutations; You can do rapid-fire trial-and-error on these, and have it done in less than a minute. You’ll find them a minority, though - they’re mostly built to warm up the player in early parts of the island, before preparing to fry their brain:

Here’s where things get really weird. As the player becomes subtly aware of in certain sections of the island, just staring at a screen isn’t enough. Clever hints will point out that the environment and puzzles can have correlations to your success. But that’s not quite it, either. The game plays around with your head to the point where you’ll start seeing puzzles where they don’t, or *can’t* belong. I’d solved one by drawing through a lake’s reflection of a non-existent line, and it still boggles me thinking that Johnny Boy came up with that. Maybe you can see it now? Aha.

It’s worth pointing out that this isn’t a game of one-off, disconnected puzzles - solving them is crucial to uncovering the rest of the island. This can range anywhere from opening Bridges &amp; Gates, revealing clues to other sections, or “powering up” something a bit more, uh, monolithic. They also use “Daisy-Chain” puzzle templates that were recently seen in the rhythmic Tron-Esque Fract Osc. I’ve found it’s better to try other puzzles or sections if a puzzle can‘t be cracked yet. The game rewards revisiting old spots, as learning how to work around the game’s enigmatic emblems can pay off for puzzles in earlier spots. The island itself feels akin to the original Myst Island, though they’ve merged the Ages with the mainland itself. It’s surprisingly organic in terms of how areas connect to one another, despite sharing Myst’s anachronistically-themed over world. A lot of these objects are less Victorian and more modern, though. There’s even a freakin’ boat.

So, some bad stuff. The Audio/Visual element seems to be the most dissatisfying part. Visuals are a bit of a grab bag. Puzzles themselves have an elegantly simple design, and the buildings/artificial surroundings are likely the more appealing in the game. Unfortunately, most natural environments(besides Clouds &amp; The Water) suffer from an oversimplified look. They’re fine from a distance, but have an uninviting view up close. You could muse that it’s as misleadingly uncomplicated as the puzzles, but I’m not quite sold on that. Audio is as minimalist as it gets. There’s no music, ambience is extremely scarce, and most of the sounds you’ll hear are either footsteps or water. I’d suggest either bringing your own soundtrack, or maybe a pod cast. There’s a fair amount of recordings by what were left of the island’s inhabitants - all of which are quotes from historical nerds.

Wouldn’t it be more natural to have people record something they‘d *like* to record, instead of Spiritual-But-Not-Religious-#Nerdsalot-While-Solving-Puzzles-And-Gawking-At-Statue-People nonsense? The voicing is fine, but I don’t believe it’s not someone standing in front of a studio mic. It’s a minor complaint, but part of a larger one. The game doesn’t necessarily need a story, but a suspension of disbelief is hurting a bit here. It feels too much like a Puzzle Playground, and less like a fleshed out world. Despite this, the game does a superb job at its three main tenets: Puzzles, Mystery, and Exploration. The Witness lacks a certain heart to it, but there’s no denying its thought-provoking and cryptic nature make for one hell of a mental gymnastics test. 600 Puzzles is a shitload of puzzle, and I’m having a ball trying to unlock its secrets.

The game works best for Myst fans, but anyone open to mental exploration while doing the cognitive cha-cha should find a strong challenge here. It's The Dark Souls of Puzzle Games, not to be confused with The Warcraft of Puzzle Games. As for myself, I’m at a bit over 240 solved and getting decently far in beating it. For now I’ll close, realizing that the end has not yet been written.

-----------------------

Exploration has been the secret ingredient of interactive media since its earliest incarnations: Ultima, Adventure, and the ongoing franchise of The Legend of Zelda. The old-school “rogue likes” and newly-popularized roguelite genre have fed into this appetite for discovery by randomly generating its own levels. New Man’s Sky proposes a scale to random generation which spans far beyond the norm; Separation through classical room-by-room scenarios are tossed out the airlock in place of entire planets built from the ground up, with a galactic listing of incomprehensible size. But is all this space and content enough? A common belief is that the larger the game, the better it is - more bang for your buck. Now we can see how well that holds up.

There’s clear inspiration from the Mass Effect 1 series, but the game has no scripted events, and its firefight moments marginal in the light of less violent pursuits. It’s very refreshing to have a game focus on non-lethal options, but it also begs the question of what that’s been *replaced* with. With a broken spaceship on a forlorn planet, armed with nothing but a mining laser, what‘s the main hook? Uh, let me get back to you on that.

Minerals. Delicious, Nutritious, and a critical part of thriving among the stars. Covered along each planet are sets of flora and protruding rock formations, comprised of elements anywhere between the basics of life(Carbon, Oxygen) to surprisingly plentiful isotopes like Plutonium. No Man’s Sky allows mining these as the building blocks for survival, upgrading your well-worn shipwreck, and as a source of economy once the world expands. It feels like they’ve mixed the first-person ingredient-collection-to-upgrade-everything formula we’ve seen in the recent Far Cry: Primal, to the Day-By-Day-Busyness (with a gradual sense of progression) that’s become notoriously addictive in the latest indie game Stardew Valley. FC: Primal and No Man’s Sky both seem to use technological upgrades as a means of game progression, but the former’s prized feature was FC’s obligatory storylines - one with a narrative depth akin to the characters they’re portraying, which isn‘t saying much. NMS leaves you to your own devices, scientific or otherwise.

Besides playing a miner role, the planets holds strange monoliths which can improve your language skills with alien NPCs. Since you learn one word at a time, there’s a bizarre pleasure from playing the verbal guessing game, based on what little you know of their lexicon and reading off written body language. Arthur C. Clarke would’ve approved of this mechanic, and I was impressed that they avoided the banal “All aliens Speak English“ route in favor of more creative directions. Oddly enough, these monoliths seem to play a role into the game’s lore as it goes on for each race, though said lore seems a bit too vague to be revelatory. Similar to the alien races, monoliths themselves add some variety through conversational options akin to the aliens’ Linguistically-Uneducated dialogue. Crashed debris of other ships can offer blueprints for upgrading yourself, or even be fixed up for flight - if you’ve a large enough deposit of minerals to craft it all.

Those may be Systems *around* the gameplay, but that isn’t all to NMS, is it? The gameplay itself, to be frank, is very minimal. Explore, Mine, Interact with random events, etc. This isn’t going to have the complexity of Eve Online: The Upgrading, Planetary Variability, and how its gameplay components intermingle becomes the main attraction, with Walking/Mining/Crafting/NPC Interaction as the key aspects of interest. Besides “Primary” objectives like building the hyper drive, It’s not uncommon to encounter mini-quests revolving the use of resources. Maybe you need to upgrade further with a new blueprint, or found a transmission become that requires a bypass chip, and you may not have the elements for that sort of thing. The planet becomes your oyster to find your way through the tasks.

My main issue with No Man’s Sky is that tasting the oyster gets grating after a while; All the “new” events become old hat after enough systems have been discovered. Another transmission leads to another outpost, which outside of a single NPC is really just a store. The *planets* are unique, the events are typically not. Monoliths tend to have new content as well, but I fail to see this along with its outposts holding up for more than a 6-8 hour stretch. It’s fair enough to argue this is true for similar rogue likes, but there’s traditionally a greater depth to its gameplay than what‘s here. Upgrading exists, but most of it is extraneously built to smooth out existing features, not lay out entirely new ones. Even Stardew Valley in the space of a small town offers more upgrade options. The game inspires awe; But after long enough time spent, it only barely inspires visits to another planet - mostly for the sake of seeing the new planet and not the old buildings.

Even though the graphical engine doesn’t go much farther than later Far Cry games, the bizarre planetary landscapes the game creates can be mind boggling, especially for something that‘s presumably generated through procedure. I’ve seen snakelike arches of colossal sediment barreling into perpetuity, tints of magenta within sight of a blood moon, foreboding octahedrons that beckon me closer, C-rings, and that’s just *on* the planets. While using the Galactic Hyper Drive resembles a mix between Spore and Mass Effect, launching off planets and onto others is all done within your own ship in first-person perspective. Flying through space is fun as hell - occasionally you’ll even get in a firefight, but mostly it involves the zen-like eye candy of enormous-sized planets and the immeasurable expanses of space. Space Stations, Black Holes, and the enigmatic “Atlas Stations” are memorable treats along the way.

You’ve got one more drive, too - The Pulse Drive. This has to be the best-looking part of the game. It’s a blaze of speed that has to be seen to be believed, and it’s worth noting that if you screenshot during this, the lights speeding past you show the “ROY G BIV” visual spectrum. Groovy. Whatever unfathomable algorithms Hello Games is using to make them all, they’re doing one hell of a job at keeping things interesting. It’s more-than-worth pointing out that the planetary changes aren’t just cosmetic, either. Your success on surviving can be altered by radiation, freezing colds, potentially hostile creatures, and mineral/floral frequency. It’s somewhat familiar to the mechanics in S.T.A.L.K.E.R., though not nearly as vicious in combat. This is a survivalist game, but values planning ahead over shooting a bullet.

No Man’s Sky reached impossible hype since its previewable debuts, and the game’s reality reminds me of why I avoid hype in the first place. If you dated someone and really hit it off, that sounds delightful. But what if a friend spends every week or so telling you about their personality traits or background, up to the “release date“? Not only is the mystery lost, but it builds even more expectations to be matched. This can make playing a game infinitely more disappointing. My point isn’t to go into games uninformed, but to take the claims of early game previews with a grain of salt and perhaps make sharper game decisions - Gamer’s Intuition is handy indeed.

As far as the actual game, I’m torn two different ways about it. It’s earned plenty of kudos in my book for inspiring-awe in its planetary designs, and I certainly like the idea of (mostly)non-violent space survivalism. Afraid this can’t elude the inevitable problem - if the core gameplay isn’t that satisfying/interesting or revolutionary, and there’s essentially no story, why bother progressing? In the case of NMS, the answer lies at the beginning of this review: Exploration. The hunger to see the unseen and know the unknown is primordial and universal, and I found myself staying the course to witness what sat at the Sea of the Stars. But a fully-fun game this does not make. These moments of greatness are marred by monotony in a game that suggests that you play ad infinitum. There’s an Einsteinian enjoyment to be had here, it can be a fun and relaxing experience, but all that comes at the cost.

I’ll give it 7 Hostile Planets out of 10.

------------

I finished Banner Saga 2. The changes made to the game aren’t “radical” per se; At least initially, the world feels like stepping right from the first to the second with most of the gameplay following suit. However, The changes to The Banner Saga have made it a more robust experience. A few under-the-hood bits. Since the save import means you could have stat maxing fairly early in the game, something closer to Mass Effect 2’s evolution system has been thrown in. Some stat changes add greater chances to dodge attacks, land criticals, and the like. Speaking of save imports, it’s not the end if you lost your original saves - the most important change is offered up for every new game. Hold it.

Let’s talk about the first for a sec. For all its success, Banner Saga had plenty of room for improvement. Story-wise, it doesn’t really pick up until the last third, otherwise playing as a dialogue-heavy Oregon Trail - the main attractions come from CYOA Player Choice, combat, and the NPCs themselves. Though dialogue sections pop up between major cities and events, there’s aren’t major revelations or the like from most of these characters. It’s also a shame that many of the spaces in between those cities boil down to snow and(you guessed it) more snow. Banner Saga 2 remedies all this.

Thankfully, the newly varied canvas for the Norse-Based Nights Watch also throws a few curveballs in terms of scenarios and a brand new race which was *briefly* mentioned in the first game. If you’re looking for mobility that contrasts the Varl’s dawdling march, a horse is a fine companion. Their natural speed allows for a sort of hit-and-run tactic, which can considerably switch up your approach to the game’s turn-based combat. Their exotic nature and rare presence adds the inevitable matter of prejudice into further scenarios, but that role isn’t all they’re involved with.

The newly varied canvas isn’t *just* a canvas. Combat events and player choice are greatly heightened, the former now holds more scripted affairs. Early in the game, one chase scene managed to drop my jaw, particularly how it integrated previous events and the path ahead through options which *really* test the weight of your ideals.

Soundtrack is legit. It feels more memorable, now with full vocals which apparently includes YouTuber Malukah? Well, can’t go wrong with that pick. Newer character designs really nailed it for me: Folka’s a nice take on what I assume Reubenesque Maidens of the Norse variety should look like. Conversely, the horseborn visually stand out with a vibrant color pallete that’s as wild as the herd themselves. Cinematics, while fleeting in length, are much more frequent and a blast to watch.

The series was, and still is fairly light in thematic content. Fortunately, the plot earns more kudos this round than just building up to killing a big red dude. What makes Number 2’s story such a stark divergence is how its recurring characters play a larger part in shaping the story itself, and in building up backstory in turn. Some of this is planted, some seen at face value. A few other reviewers have labeled the ending as anticlimactic. While this is true compared to the first, the end feels more than appropriate, bordering on cliffhanger(in a good way). Not that far off from Empire Strikes Back.

Complaints…their attempts at humor fall kinda flat. Maybe they’re better off doing what they do best: depressing me with a daisy chain of exceedingly bleak moral dilemmas Occasionally switching through dialogue when a character leaves will simply *pop* them out of existence. This may be a legacy issue, I can’t recall. In either case, I wouldn’t mind seeing cleaner transitions. The “dream” sequences are very interesting, but the perspective of 2D and implied 3D create an ungainly perspective in the process. Lastly, one of the last fights in the game(though winning isn’t required) has a mind-bogglingly awkward design and seems too drawn-out to be worth the effort.

Outside of that? It feels more well-rounded and robust than the previous entry. I’m very happy with Banner Saga 2, and the third can’t come soon enough. Anyway, here’s a vertical slice of Viking pie. Recorded around the halfway point of the game, so spoilers beware.

I'll definitely be handling Mafia III, Final Fantasy, and ME:A. You've got weird timing; I was thinking of doing reviews for some of my favorite games of yesteryear after giving them a replay.

Post by Obsidian Gryphon on Sept 9, 2016 13:18:14 GMT

AJ put out a new game review; DEMD. I watched streams of the gameplay and don't think much of it. I was bored when players go around exploring, handling and picking up stuff (though Bike ham it up, I like his RP ). Totally zonked out with dialogue cutscenes; at the lip sync and wooden animation. One point I totally agree with AJ. I don't ever want to see micro-transactions in any SP games.

Yes, there is a grander mystery to technically solve, but only your own curiosity will get you there; the world doesn’t care if you do, it is cold and empty in that way. A perfect juxtaposition to the lavish beauty and diverse island itself to be sure, but a fact nonetheless. You are alone here, and your only reward is what you make of it.

The Cave section pretty much stamps that in, if you reached that far. Virtually all the puzzles there are disconnected to level progression, but I found myself trying to solve them anyway just for the sake of that a-ha moment.

It is not surprising, considering how “bare-boned” The Witness, the latest game from developer Jonathan Blow, seems on the surface.

I’ve heard plenty of “Well it’s just drawing lines followed by more drawing lines”; Virtually all Gameplay-Heavy/Zero-Writing games could go under the same scrutiny. They’ve sprinkled more-than-enough variability in the game between puzzle types(conventional or otherwise), Monolith puzzles, and the density of The Island itself to avoid tedium.

It is easy to dismiss The Witness outright for this pretension, but it is also the game’s only underlying theme.

I guess that depends if you count the video logs and audio bits, which jump anywhere from metaphysical to metaphorical and Shakespearean. The puzzles aren‘t integrated with the logs themselves, which leaves gameplay to derive a vague sense of authorial intent.

No Man’s Sky

The mechanics often blend together to create something different each time; finding alien ruins can allow you to slowly learn the language of the different sentient species in the galaxy, which can lead to more rewards and an understanding of their culture and motivations.

That, along with environmental Skyrim-esque eye-candy are my top enjoyed bits of the game. Deducing the intended meaning of dialogue based off a limited lexicon was far more intriguing than a *lot* of its other events.

This sensibility is where the true strength of the game is, you do these actions because you want to, be it for the experience, for a goal that you create, or simply because it’s there.

Environments can encourage to check a new area, but the crux of the gameplay elements are too often one-note: what you see is what you got last time. It’s a strength the first time out, but the objects of interest repeat themselves and rarely build on each other. How would that sensibility differ from so many other open-world games?

It is easy to reject No Man’s Sky because of its underwhelming gameplay, but it is just as easy to enjoy the gameon its own merits.

Little Column A, Little Column B. I agree with a few good points for the review but find too much of what makes the game great isn’t exclusive to that particular title and isn’t heightened by NMS enough to land itself outside of an average game. Doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy it, I had plenty of fun with it. Just think there’s one too many barriers for me to recommend this to friends & such.

I’ll give you props for doing The Witness with spending more focus on the abstract than gameplay functions; I’d have a very hard time doing the same thing for a game like that.

Yes, there is a grander mystery to technically solve, but only your own curiosity will get you there; the world doesn’t care if you do, it is cold and empty in that way. A perfect juxtaposition to the lavish beauty and diverse island itself to be sure, but a fact nonetheless. You are alone here, and your only reward is what you make of it.

The Cave section pretty much stamps that in, if you reached that far. Virtually all the puzzles there are disconnected to level progression, but I found myself trying to solve them anyway just for the sake of that a-ha moment.

It is not surprising, considering how “bare-boned” The Witness, the latest game from developer Jonathan Blow, seems on the surface.

I’ve heard plenty of “Well it’s just drawing lines followed by more drawing lines”; Virtually all Gameplay-Heavy/Zero-Writing games could go under the same scrutiny. They’ve sprinkled more-than-enough variability in the game between puzzle types(conventional or otherwise), Monolith puzzles, and the density of The Island itself to avoid tedium.

It is easy to dismiss The Witness outright for this pretension, but it is also the game’s only underlying theme.

I guess that depends if you count the video logs and audio bits, which jump anywhere from metaphysical to metaphorical and Shakespearean. The puzzles aren‘t integrated with the logs themselves, which leaves gameplay to derive a vague sense of authorial intent.

No Man’s Sky

The mechanics often blend together to create something different each time; finding alien ruins can allow you to slowly learn the language of the different sentient species in the galaxy, which can lead to more rewards and an understanding of their culture and motivations.

That, along with environmental Skyrim-esque eye-candy are my top enjoyed bits of the game. Deducing the intended meaning of dialogue based off a limited lexicon was far more intriguing than a *lot* of its other events.

This sensibility is where the true strength of the game is, you do these actions because you want to, be it for the experience, for a goal that you create, or simply because it’s there.

Environments can encourage to check a new area, but the crux of the gameplay elements are too often one-note: what you see is what you got last time. It’s a strength the first time out, but the objects of interest repeat themselves and rarely build on each other. How would that sensibility differ from so many other open-world games?

It is easy to reject No Man’s Sky because of its underwhelming gameplay, but it is just as easy to enjoy the gameon its own merits.

Little Column A, Little Column B. I agree with a few good points for the review but find too much of what makes the game great isn’t exclusive to that particular title and isn’t heightened by NMS enough to land itself outside of an average game. Doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy it, I had plenty of fun with it. Just think there’s one too many barriers for me to recommend this to friends & such.

I’ll give you props for doing The Witness with spending more focus on the abstract than gameplay functions; I’d have a very hard time doing the same thing for a game like that.

That review in particular was tough, mainly because there was so little to go on. My own feelings about it were kind of ambivalent to the complaints and issues- in the end it was thought provoking enough that it didn't matter it was a ton of obtuse puzzles.

A lot of games I notice now a days have that. No Man's Sky is pretty much set your own course, if that appeals to people it works, if it doesn't it will fail, regardless of the size of the feedback loop. It's a hard balance sometimes, harder still when folks get upset by why you don't like something in a review that is ultimately an arbitrary opinion.

Post by Obsidian Gryphon on Sept 25, 2016 23:26:43 GMT

Warhammer 40K Eternal Crusade. Watched streams and AJ is ranting now.

Really bad game packaging. Pre-order bonus did not appear for some people (the package they order does not exist any more), things bought with real $$ did not materialise in the actual game. And worst of all, ridiculous micro-transactions for a lot of stuff. Gameplay is also not good.

Post by Obsidian Gryphon on Oct 5, 2016 15:11:45 GMT

Watching Syndrome on Twitch, an indie survival space horror. The funniest part was when the cloaked monster was approaching. The streamer and all the viewers tensed as the moment of confrontation neared; he's coming! He's coming! And then, the glitch happened; everyone watched as the protag appeared outside the ship and floating away.

I find it an okay game; the streamer hasn't reached the end yet. But it's typical; lots of backtracking for items to move to the next stage. There's very little loot. 98% o the time the cabinets are empty so preserving ammo is a must. Just as well the monsters are lame in their movements.

Post by Obsidian Gryphon on Oct 6, 2016 14:07:30 GMT

Wow. Just wow. Mafia III is definitely really good in story telling and VA; watched streaming of it. Streamer got the go ahead from the devs. Lots of cutscenes, it's like watching a movie. Getting this game.

P.S. Gameplay is boring though; missions are repetitive. Not sure if it'll get better as protag builds up influence.

Post by dominus on Oct 13, 2016 2:41:17 GMT

There’s a charming, if somewhat two-faced allure to the life of a gangster. Well-suited men with bourbon and a brand new car, tied to the criminal underworld they’ve wandered in to earn it. The excitement of sin, and the luxuries of its reward. While Hangar 13’s preceding story is a familial tale of Italian stallions, Mafia III branches into something a bit outside the norm for number three. Instead of donning the Fedora Fantasy, we get an outsider being hurled into the criminal world, and an appropriately unconventional solution out is built in the process. While Vito and Clay do share some narrative tropes, how both of these stories play out are hardly the same; Our “hero” hasn’t exactly grown up into a family of crime, but the path taken draws a strange line in that eminent domain. Incidentally, the era used to tell a story of rebelling against deep-rooted regimes couldn’t have been more apt.

The 1960’s have been popularized as a transitional time between the chic innocence of its opening years, to a radical exploration of culture and reform; If you’ve seen Mad Men or Forest Gump, there‘s little need for further explanation. Our locale’s the fictional New Bordeaux, and the inspirations for it lean very close towards the historical. Besides obvious allusions to the bayous and smalltown feel of New Orleans, I’ve spent enough time in downtown Detroit and Pontiac to notice NB’s particular parallels of that well-worn urban look, down to the mid-city tunnels with sepia lighting fixed on the top. Little details like backpacks strapped to the tops of cars help bring some authenticity to the time as well. This sort of chronological replication has grown quite a bit in gaming trends, if in due part to the Assassin’s Creed franchise and GTA5’s intricate detailing of western cityscapes. But New Orleans does bring a very different flavor to the table, Mardi Gras galas included; Anyone who’s played the last game should be familiar with the team’s flair for building a sense of place, but this stems beyond visual indicators while driving around town.

Somewhere in the last few paragraphs, I neglected to mention the full name of our leading man, Lincoln Clay. A name like Lincoln’s a bit on-the-nose, but it’s my only criticism for the character - he’s managed to become one of my favorite personalities of the year. Past & Present, This is a man who’s been regularly tossed into what would normally scar a man from the inside; With time spent in the horrors of war from Vietnam, a semblance of morality’s been tied to a militaristic background that guides his particular style for justice. It holds a vague liking to the PTSD Counter-Revolutionary from Rambo: First Blood. You know, before doing Action Hero sequels and when the premise was half-interesting? This, combined with being of African-American race during a pivotal time of racial reform and equality makes Clay a bit of a Wild Card to the Mafiosos.

Facilitating most of this story are the cinematics, which are *Mwah* spot-on. It’s clear as day that Hangar 13 have an appreciation for cinema: Strong attention to lighting(especially the Sal Marcano scenes), good use of focus change, and solid cinematography. The quality animation for the character cinematics are pushing the boundaries for mocap, presumably without using an Ultra-Expensive studio similar to Rockstar’s in last generation’s L.A. Noire. A twist of the mouth from a smirk, the wrinkling of lines in a forehead, and even the reflections off teeth; These sorts of details bring to life something that would otherwise seem like just *another* piece of dialogue thrown into the Unspeakable-Cthuhlu-Mocap-Automaton that developers unremittingly churn around in the deeper recesses of cubicle space.

Ah, but what are these cinematics doing though? Beyond filling in gaps in the 1968 story, Mafia III drops the chronological framework in light of something closer to a documentary…

…which takes place at least as far as 1999? What on earth went on in the game for the timeframe to last three decades long? It’s an intriguing thought, one of several pieces to the foreshadows of film. Seems they’ve found a healthy mix between a Search-For-Facts Investigator, a sense of humanity from Father James, and the lore-building, toenail-clipping shenanigans of one Mr. Donovan. Back to the past, the greatest part I carried from the story told was how they built into the characters. The antagonist is *still* an asshole, but his change in agenda mid-game makes for interesting commentary on the protagonist himself, particularly due to Clay’s stance after-the-fact. Many of the “Boss” cinematics give you a glimpse into how they’d been strung along(or willingly joined), sometimes reflecting what Clay might become. Few of the people in this game on either side could qualify as “Good”, but characters with clear-cut Good-and-Evil personalities are rarely compelling.

Rise-To-Criminal-Glory stories aren’t anything new, but the type they’re doing here feels altogether different. Maybe like me, you’ll notice there’s something a bit *off* that the only way to bring down a kingpin involves eerily similar tactics to how that kingpin rose up in the first place? It’s not that obvious at first, but it creeps up soon enough; I’ve little doubt that was part of the developer’s intent. Is this “The good life”? That’s up to you, and vicariously…

Playing a game for narrative still requires you to *play* them, so what are we doing to find all this out? After undisclosed events for the sake of not spoiling the game(or at least any further), the game “Opens up“. This greater focus on open world in Mafia III allows Clay to conquer and command the villain’s own crew, and break it down piece-by-piece. Do enough damage to an Underboss’ business, he comes out of hiding. Kill a few Underbosses to reach *the* boss, and the empire falls from within. Are the smaller objectives to get to these sections worth the trouble? I’ve found myself mixed on this subject. Games like Witcher 3 and GTA5 seem to have a consistent quality in both smaller oddjobs and larger main quests when it comes to open world design. I hate to say it, but Mafia III leers closer to Dragon Age: Inquisition where it’s clear that the qualitative hierarchy has greater focus on certain key missions, and is a bit weak on the rest.

Let me start with the good on questlines. The “Boss” missions are really well done, with around 10 of them in the game. These manage to find creative ways in blending parts of New Bordeaux and the boss characters: Two later missions in particular involve the best use of a Video Game Steamboat I’ve seen to date(probably the first?), and the other has the sort of dark intent for game goals that feels like they were ripped out of a Hitman game.

Back to the mixed stuff. The locations are new, but many of these story quests early on boil down to either kill or interrogate, and most of them feel very bare bones in terms of interesting activity after the first time. The Associate Quests similarly suffer from being essentially the same bloody objectives - the dialogue between them adds *quite* a bit to the characters, but the gameplay‘s eventually going to get dull if done in succession. Occasionally you’ll get speech banter mid-mission in story quests, but it often boils down to killing your way to kill your way *further* to victory.

I’m not necessarily saying it has to be an ultra-scripted sequence - I can play Mario 3’s Many-Houred obstacle courses just fine without a high word count, and I‘m given enough context beforehand to know why I‘m killing these terrible dudes. But there’s just not enough to separate so many of these Kill/Interrogate/Steal sequences: The AIs are near identical, and most indoor locations can feel exactly the same. I think it worked much better for GTAV: They’d found ways to make every mission memorable through either a major set piece, a new idea, or *something* more. Even the finest wine’s going to get old if you drink it nonstop, and I think the whole repetitively-bashing-your-way-to-better-things may be Mafia III’s greatest caveat.

To be fair, the gameplay is far smoother than their previous incarnation of Mook, and H13 have seemingly become experts at blending setting-exclusive bits as part of its gameplay. I’d battered down small winery shops tied to the mob, set explosives to radioactive moneymakers, and killed a laundry list of kinky VIPs by the final mission. The game needs more of these newer types of objectives, and its first half is especially lacking that special something.

Made Man Vito Scaletta’s style of fighting was identical to his foes: Duck and Cover, and Tommy Gun. On the other side of the bayou, Clay seems more privy to stealth - its first debut in the series. Not entirely sure how I feel about this Drakeonian take on hiding in the shadows though, and I think it’s due to a lack of challenge. A la Uncharted, you’ll get Button prompts to takedown your foes which can be done while in or out of cover. In one too many cases, level design and a liberal AI vision simply allow too much opportunity to not get caught. It’s very rewarding, but also very easy.

Most of them tolerate 2-3 seconds in clear view before trying to even search for you. Even instances where I’d violently stabbed one of two people next to each other, the other wise guy barely bats an eyelash. Even if he *does*, most will give you that “surprise” gesture from V:tmB and enough time to eviscerate him without alarming the others. Combine this with some indoor levels that keep line of sight to a minimum, and you have a rewarding stealth system that can sporadically linger on effortless for the player. Instead of continually painting a picture through verbal generalizations, here’s my successful first try in confronting a bad guy without firing a single bullet:

You’re not alone in this game, and Mafia III makes great use of it. The leadership is as wide-ranging as the fictional melting pot it’s centered in, and adds a long list of, eh, let’s call them “RPG Elements”. As you make your merry way from one cesspool of racketeering to another, you’ll gain some nifty swag from your underdog comrades, “Associate Benefits” - I.e. a van as a means of mobile gun-shopping, and a “Consigliere” who stashes away the blood money. Since you’ll lose it all when health reaches 0, it’s a wise idea to either conceal it post-mission, or spend it at the gun shop. Interesting though is that as you get farther in the game, you’ll have to choose a shift of power to one racketeer leader, and leaving others in the dust can have serious consequences. Playing favorites multiple times in a group of ruffians is not the easiest experience, and it certainly props up the idea of Realistic Mafia Management - they even took the time to alter racket “Confront” dialogue if you’d ignored one person but set them up for something smaller.

So despite it sounding like half of this review was tetchy towards the gameplay, this is one of the better AAA games of the year. Thing is, these games still exist in an industry that’s constantly pushing the envelope toward greater content. As with DA:I, I don’t see every mission as consistently superb. Still, I think it’s clever in its use of story to get players wondering if that type of life is worth fantasizing about in the first place, but from an initially *reverse* role? The characters tow an interesting spot between our moral compass, and H13 naturally paints a vivid scene of what virtual new Orleans would be like.

I fed people to gators, 10/10. (Still a better love story than No Man's Sky)

Post by Obsidian Gryphon on Oct 13, 2016 7:43:07 GMT

I felt my mind dying watching the repetitive missions in the more than 20 hours of streaming. Yes, I watched the entire game played. It's too bad, the story really start out strong but the rest of it is horribly grinding. I would have loved to see more of the preacher considering that he has underground connections, missions that hit closer to home for Lincoln, more reactions from the Mafia, the big boss he's aiming to take out as he rapidly destroys his operations. But unfortunately, it's not there.